There is lots of talk about Intel making significant improvements to their 22nm process, maybe they have a new stepping coming that is even cooler than the current Ivy Bridge. More wishful thinking I know but even if they only drop 5 watts off the overall output it would make for cooler Macs.
Well, yeah, next year. So they could be waiting for that, allowing the very next iMac to have a retina display on both models. Then the iMac will go from being, at the time, almost unpurchaseable to being the only desktop computer available worth purchasing.
Compared to iMac, Mac mini has inferior spec and costs more when comparably equipped. Having said that, I prefer Mac mini simply because it is headless. I had two iMacs in the past and both died due to dust accumulation (which in turn caused the logic board to fail). Mini is much easier to open and service and cheaper to replace (since you do not need to purchase the screen, keyboard, and pointing device again). And it is more ideal for hooking up to home theater or use as a server.
Can someone explain to me why a Mac Mini is better than an iMac? I'm genuinely curious.
Hope it's true, though. I see that many, many people have been waiting on this.
EDIT: The analyst has been wrong on 3 out of 4, so far. Why's he worth quoting?
While the iMac is a great machine and a great value, for some purposes the Mac Mini is better. There are three purposes that I can think of: pro graphic design, headless servers, and media servers.
A) Professional graphic design. iMac displays aren't good enough for this for a few reasons:
1) they are too glossy and reflective. If your desk is in a position such that you have a window at your back, the iMac screens show too many reflections that make it hard to read the screen. You can buy third party displays that have a matte surface which eliminate the reflections.
2) iMac displays are very good for consumer screens, but they aren't the best for a designer. Mainly it is because they supersaturated the colors to make them "pop" more, but a pro designer needs accuracy, not "pop". NEC monitors, for example, have much more accurate color reproduction.
3) Also, iMac monitors cannot be color calibrated to the same degree that a pro monitor, with internally programmable color LUTs can be calibrated.
headless servers
The Mac Mini can run in an office or a home as a headless server. You can use it to share files, run calendar and contact servers, monitor home security, etc. For this use, usually it is preferable to have a machine that is small and unobtrusive and can be tucked away on a shelf somewhere.
C) home theater/media server
If you want to use a Mac as a DVR, you don't want a screen because you want to put it in your media center with other home theater components.
It is about time something happen. The whole line up is a relic from another century.
That being said though one box likely wouldn't do it. Rather an updated iMac and an XMac would cover many needs. I only suggest keeping an all in one because it does sell.
My current computer is from 2007, a Compaq core 2 duo 1.8 that I am running as Hackintosh but it's on it's last legs, heck in system profiler it now shows up as a 1.2 ghz and the fans are constantly going like it's a jet engine!
I really want to give Apple my money but I want a good machine that will last a long time and be good spec to handle some hardcore photoshop.
I am really keeping an eye on what is coming up and trying to decide if I continue the Hackintosh route due to lack of a decent machine from Apple, or hopefully get an official machine.
We need to see more i7's in the ranges rather than i5's, I'd take a spec'ed up MAc mini with a i7 3770, SSD and hard drive combo!
Thanks for the replies, I was genuinely curious about the iMac vs Mac Mini, as I'm still pretty new to the Mac world. Hope you all get your updates soon, 18 months is a very long time in computer terms, for sure!
I went with my first iMac earlier this year, but I wasn't willing to wait on the spec bump because my old Dell died. A retina iMac would make me kick myself, though, if they released one this fall.
As much as I'd like to see you move to real Apple hardware I think the likely hood of a professional class mid level machine is thin. Note that is exactly what I've been asking for, for years on the forums. If some of the rumors are true iMac will be vastly improved with a new screen technology. However it isn't the sort of machine I could recommend for professional usage.
My current computer is from 2007, a Compaq core 2 duo 1.8 that I am running as Hackintosh but it's on it's last legs, heck in system profiler it now shows up as a 1.2 ghz and the fans are constantly going like it's a jet engine!
I really want to give Apple my money but I want a good machine that will last a long time and be good spec to handle some hardcore photoshop.
I am really keeping an eye on what is coming up and trying to decide if I continue the Hackintosh route due to lack of a decent machine from Apple, or hopefully get an official machine.
We need to see more i7's in the ranges rather than i5's, I'd take a spec'ed up MAc mini with a i7 3770, SSD and hard drive combo!
The big problem with the Mini is power. The little box can only dissipate so much power and frankly doesn't have excess power supply capacity. Unfortunately for this go around Haswell isn't ready for the Mini. Haswell would be almost ideal for a Mini from the standpoint of professional use.
I can remember waiting 8 months for my G5 iMac. Ordered it on the day it was announced many years ago.
Now I'm waiting for an update to replace that G5 and am past the 8 month G5 wait.
I can appreciate Apple's focus on the mobile and notebook markets, but they can walk and chew gum at the same time so it isn't unreasonable (I hope) to expect new desktops in October.
I can remember waiting 8 months for my G5 iMac. Ordered it on the day it was announced many years ago.
Now I'm waiting for an update to replace that G5 and am past the 8 month G5 wait.
I can appreciate Apple's focus on the mobile and notebook markets, but they can walk and chew gum at the same time so it isn't unreasonable (I hope) to expect new desktops in October.
Maybe Jony's team has been too busy, which means the new Macs might be a redesign? ;-)
I think the Mini is better than the iMac because of the choices it gives to the user. That is the only reason, because we can't get a high spec Mini ,,,yet.
Since 2007 I've kept up with computer hardware. That started because I wanted a new computer. The Mini back then was a year and a half old. The one that came out was disappointing to almost all of the forum members. Sure it was an improvement and so were the subsequent updates. The complaints stemmed from the updates not being up to date in the industry. Apple was months to a year behind what was available. They do that regularly with their desktop models.
Apple leads Microsoft in software most of the time in the desktop area. They don't lead Linux in ideas but they do polish things very well.
I'm buying two things this year, a tablet and a computer. I know the brand of computer will probably be a System 76 because they offer more horsepower per dollar than Apple. They really do a wonderful job putting things together. They're ahead of Apple in processor speed by a long shot with their consumer devices. If the new Mini is on the cutting edge in their price point then I'll have to consider it. I'm not anti-Apple but I'm pro good deal and pro quality. Apple needs to compete for my money.
My Apple software has given me a great experience. I now know that software doesn't have to regularly freeze up the computer. I know that better alternatives to Microsoft exist. I also now know that often I get a better experience than Leopard using Linux.
Most Apple users started with Windows. They opened their minds and tried Apple. They found it better. Frustrated Apple buyers should remember to keep their minds open to new experiences. They should try Linux. It just might help them to get the computer speed they want with a wonderful OS that isn't from Microsoft. A long time ago Apple users didn't have all of the day to day programs available to them because the Apple OS wasn't compatible with Windows stuff. Linux is far beyond that problem. Sure some things aren't directly available for Linux but Linux can run Windows in a virtual environment just like OS X.
If the new Mini isn't what you'd hoped for I'm sure you can find hardware out there that suits your needs. Just put Linux on it and take off. It's free.
[QUOTE]Apples lack of updates on their entire desktop line is ridiculous, you can forgive them for not following the 3-6 month schedule of their competitors but 18 months + takes the piss. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE]iMac: 18 months old already, and the processor they're rumored to be putting in to the next update is already nearly 8 months old. [/QUOTE]
The current version of the iMac is not yet eighteen months old.
- Quiet. You do not hear it. - Cheaper and ecological. You can re-use the display. Actually, the All-in-One desktop computers should not exist, since they force to throw away a perfectly working display. They are anti-ecological. - You can purchase a matte display instead of the HORRIBLE glossy ones of the iMac. It is a health and productivity issue. - It is powerful enough.
Of course, the best would be a Mac Pro mini or a Mac mini Pro with a matte Apple Thunderbolt display, but that is not yet available.
Put in the A10 5800k APU with Hypertransport and add an on-board 7700M* second GPGPU and you've got a little pocket rocket for GCD to pass off all it's OpenCL ready code to chomp on.
Make that as a build option and it will fly off the shelf.
* Radeon 7700M has full support for OpenCL 1.2 which would give the system more shelf life than the 7600M.
Easy. It allows me to buy a separate NON-REFLECTIVE display.
Currently, Apple doesn't make a consumer-grade machine that I can use, other than the mini. It seems some people can learn to disregard the reflections in their displays, but apparently my eyes are actually wired to my brain such that I get an accurate picture of what's in front of me at all times. There ARE reflections in those frickin' glossy displays (in virtually all "normal" environments), it's just a matter of whether or not you can learn to ignore them.
So you'll buy a weaker performing computer because you haven't ever heard of buying a anti-reflective film to solve the glare problem without compromising the computing power. A matt screen OPTION would be best for a minority opinion such as yours, although I doubt Apple will comply for 10% of the small iMac market. The 90% rest of us like our smooth glass (reflective) screens.
the computers are on the back burner and not worth attention anymore. Pissing me off!
Wondering where your computer went? Haven't you heard? Apple Computer, Inc. got rid of 'computer'. Now it's just Apple, Inc. </sarcasm>
Same sentiment here too. My current iMac has seen better days. Unfortunately, so has Apple's! When Apple finally does release new iMac will it contain soon to be outdated Intel processors? 500+ days since last refresh? Ive and crew better put out something that makes one 'cream in their jeans'! Of course the same was speculated for the iPhone that had over 400 days before finally being refreshed and all that came out was a souped up iP4.
The current model fits the bill for me, but with it being 446 days old, it's due to be refreshed soon, and as long as I waited this long, I can wait a little longer to get the latest and greatest.
Comments
We can wish but Haswell is another year away.
There is lots of talk about Intel making significant improvements to their 22nm process, maybe they have a new stepping coming that is even cooler than the current Ivy Bridge. More wishful thinking I know but even if they only drop 5 watts off the overall output it would make for cooler Macs.
Originally Posted by wizard69
We can wish but Haswell is another year away.
Well, yeah, next year. So they could be waiting for that, allowing the very next iMac to have a retina display on both models. Then the iMac will go from being, at the time, almost unpurchaseable to being the only desktop computer available worth purchasing.
Compared to iMac, Mac mini has inferior spec and costs more when comparably equipped. Having said that, I prefer Mac mini simply because it is headless. I had two iMacs in the past and both died due to dust accumulation (which in turn caused the logic board to fail). Mini is much easier to open and service and cheaper to replace (since you do not need to purchase the screen, keyboard, and pointing device again). And it is more ideal for hooking up to home theater or use as a server.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
Can someone explain to me why a Mac Mini is better than an iMac? I'm genuinely curious.
Hope it's true, though. I see that many, many people have been waiting on this.
EDIT: The analyst has been wrong on 3 out of 4, so far. Why's he worth quoting?
While the iMac is a great machine and a great value, for some purposes the Mac Mini is better. There are three purposes that I can think of: pro graphic design, headless servers, and media servers.
A) Professional graphic design. iMac displays aren't good enough for this for a few reasons:
1) they are too glossy and reflective. If your desk is in a position such that you have a window at your back, the iMac screens show too many reflections that make it hard to read the screen. You can buy third party displays that have a matte surface which eliminate the reflections.
2) iMac displays are very good for consumer screens, but they aren't the best for a designer. Mainly it is because they supersaturated the colors to make them "pop" more, but a pro designer needs accuracy, not "pop". NEC monitors, for example, have much more accurate color reproduction.
3) Also, iMac monitors cannot be color calibrated to the same degree that a pro monitor, with internally programmable color LUTs can be calibrated.
The Mac Mini can run in an office or a home as a headless server. You can use it to share files, run calendar and contact servers, monitor home security, etc. For this use, usually it is preferable to have a machine that is small and unobtrusive and can be tucked away on a shelf somewhere.
C) home theater/media server
If you want to use a Mac as a DVR, you don't want a screen because you want to put it in your media center with other home theater components.
That being said though one box likely wouldn't do it. Rather an updated iMac and an XMac would cover many needs. I only suggest keeping an all in one because it does sell.
Ugh these updates need to happen soon.
My current computer is from 2007, a Compaq core 2 duo 1.8 that I am running as Hackintosh but it's on it's last legs, heck in system profiler it now shows up as a 1.2 ghz and the fans are constantly going like it's a jet engine!
I really want to give Apple my money but I want a good machine that will last a long time and be good spec to handle some hardcore photoshop.
I am really keeping an eye on what is coming up and trying to decide if I continue the Hackintosh route due to lack of a decent machine from Apple, or hopefully get an official machine.
We need to see more i7's in the ranges rather than i5's, I'd take a spec'ed up MAc mini with a i7 3770, SSD and hard drive combo!
Thanks for the replies, I was genuinely curious about the iMac vs Mac Mini, as I'm still pretty new to the Mac world. Hope you all get your updates soon, 18 months is a very long time in computer terms, for sure!
I went with my first iMac earlier this year, but I wasn't willing to wait on the spec bump because my old Dell died. A retina iMac would make me kick myself, though, if they released one this fall.
Originally Posted by Smarky
I really want to give Apple my money but I want a good machine that will last a long time and be good spec to handle some hardcore photoshop.
How does the current model not fit that bill?
The big problem with the Mini is power. The little box can only dissipate so much power and frankly doesn't have excess power supply capacity. Unfortunately for this go around Haswell isn't ready for the Mini. Haswell would be almost ideal for a Mini from the standpoint of professional use.
Now I'm waiting for an update to replace that G5 and am past the 8 month G5 wait.
I can appreciate Apple's focus on the mobile and notebook markets, but they can walk and chew gum at the same time so it isn't unreasonable (I hope) to expect new desktops in October.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenaustus
I can remember waiting 8 months for my G5 iMac. Ordered it on the day it was announced many years ago.
Now I'm waiting for an update to replace that G5 and am past the 8 month G5 wait.
I can appreciate Apple's focus on the mobile and notebook markets, but they can walk and chew gum at the same time so it isn't unreasonable (I hope) to expect new desktops in October.
Maybe Jony's team has been too busy, which means the new Macs might be a redesign? ;-)
I think the Mini is better than the iMac because of the choices it gives to the user. That is the only reason, because we can't get a high spec Mini ,,,yet.
Since 2007 I've kept up with computer hardware. That started because I wanted a new computer. The Mini back then was a year and a half old. The one that came out was disappointing to almost all of the forum members. Sure it was an improvement and so were the subsequent updates. The complaints stemmed from the updates not being up to date in the industry. Apple was months to a year behind what was available. They do that regularly with their desktop models.
Apple leads Microsoft in software most of the time in the desktop area. They don't lead Linux in ideas but they do polish things very well.
I'm buying two things this year, a tablet and a computer. I know the brand of computer will probably be a System 76 because they offer more horsepower per dollar than Apple. They really do a wonderful job putting things together. They're ahead of Apple in processor speed by a long shot with their consumer devices. If the new Mini is on the cutting edge in their price point then I'll have to consider it. I'm not anti-Apple but I'm pro good deal and pro quality. Apple needs to compete for my money.
My Apple software has given me a great experience. I now know that software doesn't have to regularly freeze up the computer. I know that better alternatives to Microsoft exist. I also now know that often I get a better experience than Leopard using Linux.
Most Apple users started with Windows. They opened their minds and tried Apple. They found it better. Frustrated Apple buyers should remember to keep their minds open to new experiences. They should try Linux. It just might help them to get the computer speed they want with a wonderful OS that isn't from Microsoft. A long time ago Apple users didn't have all of the day to day programs available to them because the Apple OS wasn't compatible with Windows stuff. Linux is far beyond that problem. Sure some things aren't directly available for Linux but Linux can run Windows in a virtual environment just like OS X.
If the new Mini isn't what you'd hoped for I'm sure you can find hardware out there that suits your needs. Just put Linux on it and take off. It's free.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]iMac: 18 months old already, and the processor they're rumored to be putting in to the next update is already nearly 8 months old.
[/QUOTE]
The current version of the iMac is not yet eighteen months old.
- Quiet. You do not hear it.
- Cheaper and ecological. You can re-use the display. Actually, the All-in-One desktop computers should not exist, since they force to throw away a perfectly working display. They are anti-ecological.
- You can purchase a matte display instead of the HORRIBLE glossy ones of the iMac. It is a health and productivity issue.
- It is powerful enough.
Of course, the best would be a Mac Pro mini or a Mac mini Pro with a matte Apple Thunderbolt display, but that is not yet available.
Originally Posted by zunx
- Quiet. You do not hear it.
When you're not doing things with it. Same with the iMac and Mac Pro, when you're not doing things.
Actually, the All-in-One desktop computers should not exist, since they force to throw away a perfectly working display. They are anti-ecological.
Other than the blindingly obvious idea of using it as a standalone display once the computer is outdated, since you can, and it's easy as pie.
- You can purchase a matte display instead of the HORRIBLE glossy ones of the iMac. It is a health and productivity issue.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
- It is powerful enough.
Right! For many people it is! And the BYOKDM is still a selling point for switchers.
Make that as a build option and it will fly off the shelf.
* Radeon 7700M has full support for OpenCL 1.2 which would give the system more shelf life than the 7600M.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64
Easy. It allows me to buy a separate NON-REFLECTIVE display.
Currently, Apple doesn't make a consumer-grade machine that I can use, other than the mini. It seems some people can learn to disregard the reflections in their displays, but apparently my eyes are actually wired to my brain such that I get an accurate picture of what's in front of me at all times. There ARE reflections in those frickin' glossy displays (in virtually all "normal" environments), it's just a matter of whether or not you can learn to ignore them.
So you'll buy a weaker performing computer because you haven't ever heard of buying a anti-reflective film to solve the glare problem without compromising the computing power. A matt screen OPTION would be best for a minority opinion such as yours, although I doubt Apple will comply for 10% of the small iMac market. The 90% rest of us like our smooth glass (reflective) screens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surothog
Hurry up and make computers, Apple!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cashxx
the computers are on the back burner and not worth attention anymore. Pissing me off!
Wondering where your computer went? Haven't you heard? Apple Computer, Inc. got rid of 'computer'. Now it's just Apple, Inc. </sarcasm>
Same sentiment here too. My current iMac has seen better days. Unfortunately, so has Apple's! When Apple finally does release new iMac will it contain soon to be outdated Intel processors? 500+ days since last refresh? Ive and crew better put out something that makes one 'cream in their jeans'! Of course the same was speculated for the iPhone that had over 400 days before finally being refreshed and all that came out was a souped up iP4.
Grrrrrr...
/
/
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple
Of course the same was speculated for the iPhone that had over 400 days before finally being refreshed and all that came out was a souped up iP4.
Good thing that's a lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
How does the current model not fit that bill?
The current model fits the bill for me, but with it being 446 days old, it's due to be refreshed soon, and as long as I waited this long, I can wait a little longer to get the latest and greatest.